From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32752 invoked by alias); 22 Sep 2003 18:59:46 -0000 Mailing-List: contact ecos-discuss-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: ecos-discuss-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 32738 invoked from network); 22 Sep 2003 18:59:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO conn.mc.mpls.visi.com) (208.42.156.2) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 22 Sep 2003 18:59:45 -0000 Received: from grante.comtrol.com (isis.visi.com [209.98.98.8]) by conn.mc.mpls.visi.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 985C3D321 for ; Mon, 22 Sep 2003 13:59:44 -0500 (CDT) Received: (qmail 16771 invoked by uid 500); 22 Sep 2003 18:58:57 -0000 Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 18:59:00 -0000 From: Grant Edwards To: eCos Discussion Message-ID: <20030922135850.A16749@visi.com> References: <20030922094312.A14731@visi.com> <20030922151746.GD9007@lunn.ch> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <20030922151746.GD9007@lunn.ch>; from andrew@lunn.ch on Mon, Sep 22, 2003 at 05:17:46PM +0200 Subject: Re: [ECOS] Keeping 2.0 source tree up to date X-SW-Source: 2003-09/txt/msg00395.txt.bz2 On Mon, Sep 22, 2003 at 05:17:46PM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote: >> Whats the recommended way to keep a 2.0 source tree up to date >> with bug fixes? I guess the answer is "there isn't one". Once you decide to use an "official" snapshot, you're more-or-less stuck. >> Do I need to try to get BOFH to allow access to the CVS tree? I've been trying to figure out how to use cvs to do something useful, and I'm stumped. Since the latest "official" source tree has all of the directories renamed (2.0 vs. current), there doesn't seem to be any way for me to use cvs to compare my ecos-2.0 source tree with the "head". >> Is there an official archive of approved patches somewhere that >> can be downloaded? Apparently no. > eCos does not use the linux model of a stable version and a > development version. Nor does it appear to use the "cvs" model. Since the 2.0 directory structure doesn't match the CVS database, I can't figure out how to use cvs to find out what's changed either. > If you want a certified release which has had extensive testing > like 2.0 had, you need to contact the commercial support > people. No, what I want is an automated way to find out what's changed since 2.0. If I knew it would be useful, I could probably argue BOFH into allowing access to the CVS server. -- Grant Edwards grante@visi.com -- Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://sources.redhat.com/fom/ecos and search the list archive: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-discuss